Tamil actor in trouble Over 'Derogatory' Remark on Hindus' Mahabharatha

[xairhossi]

He's not a anti-hindu person but anti-god

Is he Satan?

 

[$@rJen]

Is he Satan?

have you heared of atheist

 

[unbiasedopinion]

In Mahabharata, Panchali was used as a pawn while the men gambled. She was used as a collateral and India is a country that respects and honours a book that revolves around men using a woman to gamble away as if she was a mere object,

What a short sighted illiterate stupid comment was that. The book has never said gamble is good. Infact Gamble is considered a sin as per Hindu religion. So where is the question of book propagating the game of gamble or use of women as an object for gambling. The Mahabharat has very described the result of playing gamble and the miseries pandavs had to bear because of it.

 

[Śakra]

ayyy lmao
South Indians are like Afro-centrists in this regard

I've noticed all races in Souh Asia that are fish eaters are delusional af. The tamils and bengladeshis believe some of the dumbest things imaginable. I guess mercury from fish does that to you.

 

[$@rJen]

I've noticed all races in Souh Asia that are fish eaters are delusional af. The tamils and bengladeshis believe some of the dumbest things imaginable. I guess mercury from fish does that to you.

LoL... calling all the tamilian fish eaters beyond delusional..., He may be wrong in saying about Hindus worshiing the same book.. but the rest is valid... those men who used a women and shared her among them are satans

 

[manlion]

On an Indian website, what do you expect? The proto-Dravidian (even Dravidian term isnt correct since it literally means South which doesnt make sense wrt IVC) that IVC spoke was related to Brahuis, not to South Indian Dravidians who most likely got their language shifted from Austro-Asiatic to Dravidian. This is like a Sri Lankan claiming to be an 'Aryan' relative of a Norwegian or Swede just because he speaks Sinhalese. Lol. You guys should claim your Andamanese and Papuan Valley Civilization.

most Indians will not admit IVC was a Dravidian/Tamil civilization as that would undermine their political and cultural interests.

I have produced 2 non Indian researchers on Dravidian / Tamil link to IVC. Contrary to your insinuation, linguistically/culturally and genetically Tamils were closer to Sumerians ( and ancient Turks).

Map of land and sea route taken by Tamils Who Brought The Mayans To Mexico ? by Gene D. Matlock.

Who Brought The Mayans To Mexico? or Were the ancient Turks, Akkads (Sumerians) and Dravidians (Tamils) the parents of Mexico and Meso-America?

Dr. Polyat Kaya, a Turkish professor of historical linguistics, wrote: ìPre-Iranian culture was Turanian culture and civilization before the Aryans. Indus civilization was also a Turanian culture like the Sumerian culture was. Dravidian being related to these ancient cultures ties them all together and also to Turkish. They are all agglutinative languages although historians and linguists are conditioned not to mention the name Tur/Turk.î (Istanbulallingus@hotmail.com.)

For further reading : https://southturkistan.wordpress.com/2010/05/16/who-brought-the-mayans-to-mexico/

Michael Wood writes the following: [1]
"A new picture has begun to emerge, only since the 1980s. The crucial discovery has been the proving beyond any doubt, that the ancient pre-Aryan language of Iran, Elamite, is cognate with the ancient Dravidian languages still spoken in Southern India, best known of which is Tamil. These languages descend from a prehistoric speech spoken today in Iran and northwestern India, and doubtless in the early villages like Mehrgarh: indeed a pocket of related language, Braui, is still spoken today in a small area of West Pakistan on the Iranian border. The original proto-language split up around 5000 BC, at a guess, after the invention of agriculture, to judge by its common terminology in Elamite and Dravidian."

"The Indus civilization was almost certainly Dravidian, its culture closely related to Elamite world of Iran." [2]

 

[PlugnPlay]

LoL... calling all the tamilian fish eaters beyond delusional..., He may be wrong in saying about Hindus worshiing the same book.. but the rest is valid... those men who used a women and shared her among them are satans

Oh, you mean a women cannot have 5 husbands ? If she does then she is a "sinner" and the men are "satans" ? Is this because the "Bible" says so ?

 

[$@rJen]

Oh, you mean a women cannot have 5 husbands ? If she does then she is a "sinner" and the men are "satans" ? Is this because the "Bible" says so ?

**** bibile and mahabarata.. i don't care but have a human value.... did your hindusm teach those five fckrs or one fellow to gamble on that poor woman???? does gita allow that

 

[PlugnPlay]

**** bibile and mahabarata.. i don't care but have a human value.... did your hindusm teach those five fckrs or one fellow to gamble on that poor woman???? does gita allow that

One should stay away from gambling and one should certainly not gamble one's wife, and that is the moral of that story you dumb fcuk.

 

[xairhossi]

most Indians will not admit IVC was a Dravidian/Tamil civilization as that would undermine their political and cultural interests.

I have produced 2 non Indian researchers on Dravidian / Tamil link to IVC. Contrary to your insinuation, linguistically/culturally and genetically Tamils were closer to Sumerians ( and ancient Turks).

Map of land and sea route taken by Tamils Who Brought The Mayans To Mexico ? by Gene D. Matlock.

Who Brought The Mayans To Mexico? or Were the ancient Turks, Akkads (Sumerians) and Dravidians (Tamils) the parents of Mexico and Meso-America?

Dr. Polyat Kaya, a Turkish professor of historical linguistics, wrote: ìPre-Iranian culture was Turanian culture and civilization before the Aryans. Indus civilization was also a Turanian culture like the Sumerian culture was. Dravidian being related to these ancient cultures ties them all together and also to Turkish. They are all agglutinative languages although historians and linguists are conditioned not to mention the name Tur/Turk.î (Istanbulallingus@hotmail.com.)

For further reading : https://southturkistan.wordpress.com/2010/05/16/who-brought-the-mayans-to-mexico/

Michael Wood writes the following: [1]
"A new picture has begun to emerge, only since the 1980s. The crucial discovery has been the proving beyond any doubt, that the ancient pre-Aryan language of Iran, Elamite, is cognate with the ancient Dravidian languages still spoken in Southern India, best known of which is Tamil. These languages descend from a prehistoric speech spoken today in Iran and northwestern India, and doubtless in the early villages like Mehrgarh: indeed a pocket of related language, Braui, is still spoken today in a small area of West Pakistan on the Iranian border. The original proto-language split up around 5000 BC, at a guess, after the invention of agriculture, to judge by its common terminology in Elamite and Dravidian."

"The Indus civilization was almost certainly Dravidian, its culture closely related to Elamite world of Iran." [2]

The Dravidian here means Brahuis of Balochistan/Gedrosia area not Tamils of South India. Genetically and culturally, Brahuis differ very much from South Indian/Tamils and are pretty much indistinguishable from Balochs.
Refer to Zagros farmers paper, who were Neolithic migrants from West Asia to Mehrgarh. Modern day South Indians most likely shifted their language to Dravidian from Austro-Asiatic. Can a Bengali or Sri Lankan claim Yamnaya or some European civilization just because he speaks an Indo-European language?

And honestly, what connections do Tamils have with Sumerians/Levantines or Elamites/Iranians? They genetically differ a lot, if anything only Brahuis have that connection.

I've noticed all races in Souh Asia that are fish eaters are delusional af. The tamils and bengladeshis believe some of the dumbest things imaginable. I guess mercury from fish does that to you.

Lol, I guess they put some drugs in their fish. Now he's claiming Tamils are related to Sumerians and Elamites. Anything but Sri Lanka and Andaman Islands

 

[Śakra]

LoL... calling all the tamilian fish eaters beyond delusional..., He may be wrong in saying about Hindus worshiing the same book.. but the rest is valid... those men who used a women and shared her among them are satans

idc what a zionist has to say. Satan lives in Beit Aghion

 

[xairhossi]

have you heared of atheist

could've just said atheist. Anti-god gives a Satan vibe.

 

[DineshS]

Idiots & Cowards like Kamal Hassan take the easy route attacking the soft target.
Yet, they forget the important fact. Mahabharatha is historic. People in it as human and as godly as everyday people.

Coming to Draupadi and the whole sordid episode of Yudhistar loosing her in gambling, it is well documented. The outrage was well documented. There is no one who says what Yudhitar did is right or just. He was wrong, plain and simple. As matter of fact, even Draupadi demands to know if Yudhistar lost himself before loosing her in gambling.
It was a shameful act and well acknowledged.

What is also acknowledged is that the whole incident is the Pivot for Mahabharatha. Without what happened to her that day, the war wouldn't have happened or would not have been as acrimonious. That single act was the point of no return for both sides.

Coming to Kamal Hassan and his Duplicity & cowardise, though Mahabharatha is not religious scripture, this coward takes the easy out being critical of things most acknowledge as wrong, all the while his wilful cowardice makes him blind to the obvious sordid other things.

 

[manlion]

The Dravidian here means Brahuis of Balochistan/Gedrosia area not Tamils of South India. Genetically and culturally, Brahuis differ very much from South Indian/Tamils and are pretty much indistinguishable from Balochs.
Refer to Zagros farmers paper, who were Neolithic migrants from West Asia to Mehrgarh. Modern day South Indians most likely shifted their language to Dravidian from Austro-Asiatic. Can a Bengali or Sri Lankan claim Yamnaya or some European civilization just because he speaks an Indo-European language?

And honestly, what connections do Tamils have with Sumerians/Levantines or Elamites/Iranians? They genetically differ a lot, if anything only Brahuis have that connection.

you are just going in circles, every researcher have identified the Dravidians of IVC as Tamils not Brahuis (except Pakistani) or the so called Dravidians of S India. (Unless you can show historical and cultural evidence to validate the contrary)

Even if we were to accept your opinion for argument sake, the present Brahuis , are culturally and racially diluted lot. Whereas, this isn't the case with Tamils, hence your proposition that language shift is invalid. The most likely theory would be, when the Sumerians were sacked by the Gutians and other Semites around 2100 B.C, large scale SumeroTamils migrated to the sub continent and finally 'pushed' to settle in the South establishing the Tamil sangam culture.

The Mediterraneans or Dravidians were associated with the ancient Sumerian civilizations of Mesopotamia and of Elam (southern Iran). Authors have pointed out ethnic, linguistic and cultural affinities between the Sumerians (Mesopotamians) and the Dravidians of South India, and concluded that(( both probably belonged to the same ethnic stock.))

http://www.israel-a-history-of.com/dravidians-indians-and-sumerians.html

Elamite and Tamil Connection

http://www.academia.edu/7608175/Elamite_and_Tamil_Connection

I have produced heaps of research works to support my case , unlike you whose retort is based on Albino hearsay

What is also acknowledged is that the whole incident is the Pivot for Mahabharatha. Without what happened to her that day, the war wouldn't have happened or would not have been as acrimonious. That single act was the point of no return for both sides.

Draupadi was a vicious arrogant woman. the war (and subsequent genocide by god Krishna) would not have happened if she had apologized to Duryodhana for using illusion to trick and humiliate him in the palace

Coming to Kamal Hassan and his Duplicity & cowardise, though Mahabharatha is not religious scripture, this coward takes the easy out being critical of things most acknowledge as wrong, all the while his wilful cowardice makes him blind to the obvious sordid other things.

Vishnu sahasranamam and BG are taken from the MB book -

 

[DineshS]

Vishnu sahasranamam and BG are taken from the MB book -

Nope. You are wrong on both counts.